InfantryAg said:

---

I agree Branca's analysis is flawed insofar as looking at the case as you would a citizen/ non-LE perspective. Most people on this thread are using these same arguments whether for or against the shooting being legal.

Troy's analysis is still wrong and dated.

Police use of force is judged primarily by Graham V Connor. Scott V Harris will probably come into play, at least with the civil case. If you aren't familiar with Graham V Connor, your opinion is not based on the actual case law governing this.

Here are the facts...
Capital Police are supposed to protect members of Congress. This was the final barricade before reaching the area where senators and congressmen were located. The barricade was breached by the crowd. The crowd was angry and breaking out glass and attempting to breach the barricade. This is not protesting, this is a riot (18USC 2102 (a). Babbit was going through the breach and just entered into the restricted area. The crowd trying to enter the restricted area, Babbit was just the first through.

So the question is, what was the crowd going to do in the restricted area?

A reasonable officer could conclude that the "mob" would continue to come through the breach. When they reached the senators and congressman they could assault them, hold them hostage, have tea with them. LE does not have to wait for an assault, they can and should react to the threat of an imminent assault. A reasonable officer in that situation could conclude the senators and congressman he was assigned to protect, would be assaulted.

Had Babbit been by herself, or with a small group, that changes the equation. The more people allowed to breach, the less likely the officers could stop them (as shown in the rest of the capitol). Had a number of blm breached the White House the previous summer, Secret Service isn't going to let them get to POTUS before starting to shoot. Even if the crowd is "unarmed."

Also,
Police also do not have "rules of engagement."
DOJ guidelines are not law. USCP is not part of the DOJ anyway.
And yes, it's tragic that she died.

---

My opinion is based on training and personal experience. I re-cert every two years. Secondly use of the term ROE isn't the actual proper term, but it's easier to describe than spelling ou the proper terms fully. Police forces primarily operate within civilian communities to enforce local laws, maintain public order, and protect individuals and property. Their rules of engagement are defined by local and national laws, department policies, and the term I should have used, protocols for the use of force. But I'm sure you get my drift. Also State and local police generally swear an oath to the US Constitution, as a civil servant. I never said the CHPD was part of the DOJ, however on their own website, i posted a link earlier, they abide by the protocols and guidelines set forth by the DOJ. That's what it says in their actual policy. Being that they are an actual government entity and not an individual municipality or State organization, it makes perfect sense they would follow the guidelines and protocols of the DOJ, since the DOJ is the head of all federal law enforcement. That was made whole when the US Marshal Service was moved from the Judiciary Branch to the DOJ and the executive branch. People sometime confuse the US Secret Service for LEO when in fact now since they were removed out from under the US Treasury are considered strictly protection, not enforcement. They can detain you but have to turn you over to the DOJ (FBI/USMS, etc) and the CHPD gets it's training at the FLETC like all the other FLEOs. SO like I said earlier it makes perfect since their Policies and Protocols regarding use of lethal force are in line with the DOJ.

And we agree that the shoot was tragic and Babbitt is deceased as a result of it. We just differ on justification and that's okay, that's what opinions are for. I apologize for using the simpler term ROE instead of typing out all the other mess each time, I'm lazy and I don't think an acronym changes the facts.

So what makes you believe that the Secret Service isn't a law enforcement agency with the power of arrest?

Ags77 said:

---

I hate that this woman died that day, but if you break in my home you are very likely to get shot, armed or unarmed. I probably won't wait to ask or see if you are armed.

---

Yeah I agree… but then video surfaced of police ushering people into the building. Would almost make it seem like they were welcome and shouldn't be concerned about getting shot. Right? Or do you invite trespassers into your house to shoot them?

There was a video done on her shooting I watched about 6 months ago, that made it look like a Gov't psyops and that she was still alive. Anyone have that video?

cslifer said:

---

So what makes you believe that the Secret Service isn't a law enforcement agency with the power of arrest?

---

Start a thread on the Secret Service and we will discuss it

gonemaroon said:

---

There was a video done on her shooting I watched about 6 months ago, that made it look like a Gov't psyops and that she was still alive. Anyone have that video?

---

Thank you, F16.

Foreverconservative said:

---

cslifer said:

---

So what makes you believe that the Secret Service isn't a law enforcement agency with the power of arrest?

---

Start a thread on the Secret Service and we will discuss it

---

Why it need a new thread
You should be able to answer it in less than 10 words

He can't explain it without getting into sovereign citizen level understanding of the law.

2040huck said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

2040huck said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

If she wasn't a white woman, this would be different

---

No it would not. The legal analysis of whether it was justifiable homicide would remain the same.

---

Close your eyes and imagine it was a few hundred black people chanting hang Ted Cruz And then one broke into the inter chamber

---

Not analogous at all.

---

Yes it is. And you would have been singing the praises of the officer who saved the day from the rioters.

---

Is this all you do in arguments? Create strawmen?

If I were someone like you I would pause and ask myself why my "side" had to create a Hollywood production for television while completely and shamelessly hiding all available exculpatory evidence. I would ask myself why no insurrectionists had weapons. After that I'd probably look up the actual definition of insurrection. Luckily I'm not someone like you though.

Some seem to think fatal force against someone possibly committing a crime is ok. Explain why Chauvin is in prison then.

Again, if she were a liberal, nobody on here would care that she was shot.

torrid said:

---

gonemaroon said:

---

There was a video done on her shooting I watched about 6 months ago, that made it look like a Gov't psyops and that she was still alive. Anyone have that video?

---

Thank you, F16.

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Again, if she were a liberal, nobody on here would care that she was shot.

---

Again?

Once was a straw man. Twice is just hubris.

It's a Sap-headed take.

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

2040huck said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

If she wasn't a white woman, this would be different

---

No it would not. The legal analysis of whether it was justifiable homicide would remain the same.

---

Close your eyes and imagine it was a few hundred black people chanting hang Ted Cruz And then one broke into the inter chamber

---

This is absolute garbage.

---

Except I don't think those congressmen huddled in the chamber blocking the door with some folks guns pulled thought this was garbage.

They feared for their lives.

No one seems to posit what would have happened if they allowed the rioters into the chamber or to get physical hold of Pelosi and other Dems. Were they just going to yell at them? If so then zip ties and pepper spray weren't necessary.

I think anyone who wasn't in that exact position are just guessing as to what happened and what they'd do. Very few people have all of the information and context (myself included). So I certainly acknowledge I could be wrong. I can tell you that if I was being rushed at by a mob shouting obscenities' and I was outnumber and armed, I'd likely have to decide in a split second if they are there to harm me or the people I am responsible for, or to just not react and hope for the best. I'd be curious how most LEO's would be trained to react in these situations.

He's playing the race card with absolutely nothing to back it up except for his own opinion. In other words…a strawman. A disgusting one at that.

Nice rant though.

Always funny what topics you pick and choose to write novels about on this forum.

Quote:

---

Always funny what topics you pick and choose to write novels about on this forum.

---

But they are ALWAYS in defense of the left.

Quote:

---

I'd be curious how most LEO's would be trained to react in these situations.

---

Here you go:

LINK

Quote:

---

In light of recent mass demonstrations in cities and towns across the nation, CPE produced this set of guidelines to assist law enforcement agencies in aligning their policies with best practices around de-escalation and use of force in crowd management events. The guidelines are informed by two foundational obligations of law enforcement during these events: (1) the obligation to protect the First Amendment rights of demonstrators and counter-demonstrators, and (2) the obligation to ensure the safety of all persons involved in or affected by these demonstrations by implementing safe, responsible approaches to crowd management.

---

Quote:

---

Prohibit deploying kinetic impact projectiles into a crowd for any purpose, and prohibit the use of less lethal weapons (such as tear gas, smoke bombs, flashbangs, pepper balls, mace, and other chemical agents) to control peaceful crowds and individuals who are not posing any immediate threat of serious harm. Prohibit any practice in which demonstrators are boxed in or guided to an area from which all avenues of egress are blocked (sometimes referred to as "kettling"). Ensure that the Incident Commander assigns a supervising officer, at the rank of lieutenant (or equivalent) or higher, to the Incident Command post to review and respond to serious use-of-force incidents in real time.

---

Quote:

---

Make clear, explicit, and mandatory the obligation to provide and call for medical assistance for persons injured at demonstrations (whether they are injured by officers' use of force or otherwise).

---

Quote:

---

Amend policy manuals to require that badges, nameplates, and other personal and agency identifiers be made visible at all times on the outside of each officer's helmet or uniform, and that every officer provide their surname, badge number, rank, and law enforcement agency verbally upon request. Ensure that when a person is arrested at a crowd management event, the arresting officer is in uniform, if possible. Require that any plainclothes officer who is involved in an arrest must a) show the arrestee an official badge that identifies the arresting officer as a police officer and identifies their LEA and badge number, and b) immediately request the attendance of a uniformed officer. Ensure that anyone assigned to crowd management duty is a sworn police officer who has received training in crowd management and de-escalation. Unidentified persons, untrained persons, and persons who are not sworn police officers shall not be deployed for this purpose. Ensure that officers comply with judicial decisions, municipal bylaws, state and federal laws, and directives from municipal governments and police chiefs with respect to methods of crowd control.

---

Quote:

---

In response to all these concerns, the use of such weapons has been banned or severely restricted in several cities, including Dallas, Seattle, Portland (OR), Denver, and the states of Oregon and Colorado.51 We recommend that crowd management policies adopt the following rules, agreed to by the City of Dallas and implemented in a June 2020 consent decree:52 Prohibit the firing or deployment of kinetic impact projectiles into a crowd for any purpose; Prohibit the use of less lethal weapons such as tear gas, OC spray, pepper balls, smoke bombs, flashbangs, or any other chemical irritant to control peaceful crowds; and against any demonstrator, bystander, civilian, resident, observer, or member of the press who does not pose any immediate threat of serious harm to anyone.

---

Quote:

---

ALL PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING ARRESTED MUST BE ABLE TO SEE AND KNOW, AS THEY ARE BEING ARRESTED, THAT THE INDIVIDUALS DETAINING THEM ARE POLICE OFFICERS

---

Any other questions?

Quote:

---

And the training for Capitol Hill Police is very dismal. They are literally the Keystone Cops they are so inept.

---

Typical political patronage job, low threat, no real skill required other than fealty to the Democrat overlords.

They quit being demonstrators and turned into a mob when they physically went through barricades and entered the building. If they had stayed outside and protested, then what you posted would definitely apply.

BBRex said:

---

They quit being demonstrators and turned into a mob when they physically went through barricades and entered the building. If they had stayed outside and protested, then what you posted would definitely apply.

---

Even when the cops were holding the door open for them and even serving as tour guides at times?

Yes. They weren't authorized to be there. And that becomes more of an issue as they go deeper into the building.

BBRex said:

---

Yes. They weren't authorized to be there. And that becomes more of an issue as they go deeper into the building.

---

Wow that quite an insurrection!

Apparently so. How many folks are in prison now over this?

BBRex said:

---

Apparently so. How many folks are in prison now over this?

---

Who's DOJ put them in prison?
The same DOJ that gave the BurnersLootersMurderers a pass? Even taking care of their bail?

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

2040huck said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

2040huck said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

If she wasn't a white woman, this would be different

---

No it would not. The legal analysis of whether it was justifiable homicide would remain the same.

---

Close your eyes and imagine it was a few hundred black people chanting hang Ted Cruz And then one broke into the inter chamber

---

Not analogous at all.

---

Yes it is. And you would have been singing the praises of the officer who saved the day from the rioters.

---

Is this all you do in arguments? Create strawmen?

If I were someone like you I would pause and ask myself why my "side" had to create a Hollywood production for television while completely and shamelessly hiding all available exculpatory evidence. I would ask myself why no insurrectionists had weapons. After that I'd probably look up the actual definition of insurrection. Luckily I'm not someone like you though.

---

Luckily, I dont give one crap what you think. You make up stuff all the time. However, what I said is true. Most on here would not care if a protester coming after Cruz was shot while breaking through a door, armed or not

BluHorseShu said:

---

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

2040huck said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

If she wasn't a white woman, this would be different

---

No it would not. The legal analysis of whether it was justifiable homicide would remain the same.

---

Close your eyes and imagine it was a few hundred black people chanting hang Ted Cruz And then one broke into the inter chamber

---

This is absolute garbage.

---

Except I don't think those congressmen huddled in the chamber blocking the door with some folks guns pulled thought this was garbage.

They feared for their lives.

No one seems to posit what would have happened if they allowed the rioters into the chamber or to get physical hold of Pelosi and other Dems. Were they just going to yell at them? If so then zip ties and pepper spray weren't necessary.

I think anyone who wasn't in that exact position are just guessing as to what happened and what they'd do. Very few people have all of the information and context (myself included). So I certainly acknowledge I could be wrong. I can tell you that if I was being rushed at by a mob shouting obscenities' and I was outnumber and armed, I'd likely have to decide in a split second if they are there to harm me or the people I am responsible for, or to just not react and hope for the best. I'd be curious how most LEO's would be trained to react in these situations.

---

Do me a favor and go back and look at the video of the shooting. But don't look at the crowd, or Babbit, or the Capitol officer's gun hand.

Look at the people in the hallway behind the officer who he was allegedly "protecting". Were they running in fear? Or were they milling around with little to no concern of the crowd?

Here's a hint. They weren't running.

2040huck said:

---

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

2040huck said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

2040huck said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

If she wasn't a white woman, this would be different

---

No it would not. The legal analysis of whether it was justifiable homicide would remain the same.

---

Close your eyes and imagine it was a few hundred black people chanting hang Ted Cruz And then one broke into the inter chamber

---

Not analogous at all.

---

Yes it is. And you would have been singing the praises of the officer who saved the day from the rioters.

---

Is this all you do in arguments? Create strawmen?

If I were someone like you I would pause and ask myself why my "side" had to create a Hollywood production for television while completely and shamelessly hiding all available exculpatory evidence. I would ask myself why no insurrectionists had weapons. After that I'd probably look up the actual definition of insurrection. Luckily I'm not someone like you though.

---

Luckily, I dont give one crap what you think. You make up stuff all the time. However, what I said is true. Most on here would not care if a protester coming after Cruz was shot while breaking through a door, armed or not

---

Excuse me…what??

***YOU LITERALLY JUST MADE THAT SCENARIO UP***

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

2040huck said:

---

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

2040huck said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

2040huck said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

If she wasn't a white woman, this would be different

---

No it would not. The legal analysis of whether it was justifiable homicide would remain the same.

---

Close your eyes and imagine it was a few hundred black people chanting hang Ted Cruz And then one broke into the inter chamber

---

Not analogous at all.

---

Yes it is. And you would have been singing the praises of the officer who saved the day from the rioters.

---

Is this all you do in arguments? Create strawmen?

If I were someone like you I would pause and ask myself why my "side" had to create a Hollywood production for television while completely and shamelessly hiding all available exculpatory evidence. I would ask myself why no insurrectionists had weapons. After that I'd probably look up the actual definition of insurrection. Luckily I'm not someone like you though.

---

Luckily, I dont give one crap what you think. You make up stuff all the time. However, what I said is true. Most on here would not care if a protester coming after Cruz was shot while breaking through a door, armed or not

---

Excuse me…what??

***YOU LITERALLY JUST MADE THAT SCENARIO UP***

---

Which scenario? Protesters breaking through a door? Yeah, they were shouting where is Nancy and Hang Mike Pence, but the scenario is the same. Not surprised you don't understand an analogy

2040huck said:

---

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

2040huck said:

---

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

2040huck said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

2040huck said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

If she wasn't a white woman, this would be different

---

No it would not. The legal analysis of whether it was justifiable homicide would remain the same.

---

Close your eyes and imagine it was a few hundred black people chanting hang Ted Cruz And then one broke into the inter chamber

---

Not analogous at all.

---

Yes it is. And you would have been singing the praises of the officer who saved the day from the rioters.

---

Is this all you do in arguments? Create strawmen?

If I were someone like you I would pause and ask myself why my "side" had to create a Hollywood production for television while completely and shamelessly hiding all available exculpatory evidence. I would ask myself why no insurrectionists had weapons. After that I'd probably look up the actual definition of insurrection. Luckily I'm not someone like you though.

---

Luckily, I dont give one crap what you think. You make up stuff all the time. However, what I said is true. Most on here would not care if a protester coming after Cruz was shot while breaking through a door, armed or not

---

Excuse me…what??

***YOU LITERALLY JUST MADE THAT SCENARIO UP***

---

Which scenario? Protesters breaking through a door? Yeah, they were shouting where is Nancy and Hang Mike Pence, but the scenario is the same. Not surprised you don't understand an analogy

---

I'm going to type this really slowly.

Below I have quoted the scenario that you made up out of whole cloth in this thread. You are now squirming and twisting in order to deflect after someone pointed your gross dishonesty out by attempting to call it an "analogy".

But the fact remains that you created a strawman in order to infer other posters are racist. You don't have an honest bone in your body. This is your direct quote from this exact thread:

Quote:

---

Close your eyes and imagine it was a few hundred black people chanting hang Ted Cruz And then one broke into the inter chamber

---

By the way…I noticed you kept this sock in the chamber longer than some of your others.

Rockdoc said:

---

BBRex said:

---

Apparently so. How many folks are in prison now over this?

---

Who's DOJ put them in prison?
The same DOJ that gave the BurnersLootersMurderers a pass? Even taking care of their bail?

---

How many folks who stayed outside are in prison?

The BLM riots didn't happen at the Capitol Building. And I would have supported law enforcement stopping those protests when they turned into riots, too.

Enrique Tarrio, for one. He wasn't even in DC that day.

BBRex said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

BBRex said:

---

Apparently so. How many folks are in prison now over this?

---

Who's DOJ put them in prison?
The same DOJ that gave the BurnersLootersMurderers a pass? Even taking care of their bail?

---

How many folks who stayed outside are in prison?

The BLM riots didn't happen at the Capitol Building. And I would have supported law enforcement stopping those protests when they turned into riots, too.

---

I go with Jonathan Turleys explanation that this was not an insurrection. He's a constitutional lawyer. But perhaps you are too.

Quote:

---

The BLM riots didn't happen at the Capitol Building. And I would have supported law enforcement stopping those protests when they turned into riots, too.

---

So rioting near the gates of the WH don't count?